User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 373

  1. #31
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    FWIW, my previous point is that I personally thought some S descriptions were appealing. Especially ISFP and ISTP.
    They are not necessarily all unappealing, so that's natural (though some of those SJ descriptions are pretty awful on their own. Like the TypeLogic ones, for instance.)
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  2. #32
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    They are not necessarily all unappealing, so that's natural (though some of those SJ descriptions are pretty awful on their own. Like the TypeLogic ones, for instance.)
    That's a fair point. I have an ESTJ friend, for example, who I don't exactly want to show many descriptions to. The good thing is, he doesn't care. :P He took a test and moved on (not that tests mean anything, but he is a pretty clear ESTJ to me at least). I think he wouldn't mind some of the points about keeping traditions though. He is like that. He had this period after highschool when he wasn't, but even then, he was still always one to emphasize what was different to him or whatnot. SJ descriptions could do without a lot of the implied "lack of self-exploration" however. They're not "guardians" exactly.

  3. #33
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allegorystory View Post
    Hmm...I neither agree nor disagree with this.

    I mean, while I find a lot of the systems that make up my culture spectacularly arbitrary and while most of the time I balk at how many people simply write me off as a "nerd," a "weirdo," someone who "thinks too much." Even though it irritates me that even though I find very little point in doing things most people consider "normal, everyday important stuff" I still have to do those things to be an integrated member of my own society.

    However, I'm the one to blame here, really. It's my own mentality that sets me apart and that's not the fault of anyone else. I could sit around and blame everyone else, but it won't do squat. And I ENJOY thinking the way I do so really I'm just perpetuating my own "isolation" (if I can even call it that).

    Or I can suck it up, realize that most people don't think like I do and see how best I can integrate myself with them.

    Because if they feel similarity with me (and like by me) they'll be more open to the things I have to say. If I treat them with bitterness and anger (for all the supposed "injustices" they "inflict" upon my uniqueness) then they'll treat me accordingly.

    I really do think it's all about perspective. Nothing in this world is as bad as your mind makes it out to be.
    I agree with most of this, actually...but, are you suggesting that it's YOUR fault you think the way you do? Surely it isn't the fault of others but is it yours.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    They are not necessarily all unappealing, so that's natural (though some of those SJ descriptions are pretty awful on their own. Like the TypeLogic ones, for instance.)
    Yeah I think SJ descriptions are worse than SP
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  4. #34
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Anyway, none of this is an argument against my contention that the glossier N descriptions have a persuasive impact on people trying to type themselves. EVERY person I've had take a test or read the descriptions IRL has chosen an N type first. Even my mother, who is the most ISTJ woman on the planet, chose INTJ. And really, this is not surprising, nor does it take a fucking rocket scientist to see why. I tend to think that things would be more balanced if only the socionics descriptions existed, because those seem to give a fair assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of different types, and they're not gussied up because someone really loves being an INFP or INTP.
    This is very true. I agree that there are a lot of things you can derive from the S descriptions by reading between the lines. Then again this is easier when you read the N ones first.

    I always liked the socionics descrptions from this side best: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ikisocion_home
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  5. #35
    All Natural! All Good!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDude View Post
    That's a fair point. I have an ESTJ friend, for example, who I don't exactly want to show many descriptions to. The good thing is, he doesn't care. :P He took a test and moved on (not that tests mean anything, but he is a pretty clear ESTJ to me at least). I think he wouldn't mind some of the points about keeping traditions though. He is like that. He had this period after highschool when he wasn't, but even then, he was still always one to emphasize what was different to him or whatnot. SJ descriptions could do without a lot of the implied "lack of self-exploration" however. They're not "guardians" exactly.
    I think this is true. I showed descriptions to a few SFJs in my life after they tested as SFJ and they thought the descriptions were flattering. I couldn't believe it. So it seems like a bit of, to SJs, the SJ descriptions are not that bad. Some of them.
    Strychnine is all-natural,
    So strychnine is all good.
    It's Godly and righteous,
    So eat it, you should.
    Who are you to refuse nature's will?


    Don't use the multiquote; it was planted by the devil to deceive us.

    Social Role: Asscrack/Piece of Shit/Public Defecator/Spiteful Urinator


    A different type everyday - so no need to type me anymore. But feel free to enjoy the sound of your own asscrack.

  6. #36
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    I think I understand what Orangey is trying to say, here.

    I can definitely agree that there's some bias in Keirsey's descriptions, after having read some less biased ones. However, the problem is twofold. Keirsey's descriptions and similar ones are the most popular, AND the communities that have been established all have this bias among the members as a result. I am not certain precisely how much mistyping this bias has resulted in, although I'm sure it has resulted in some.

    I think that in Keirsey's descriptions, and in most people's minds, Sensors are underestimated in their potential to develop N, and Intuitives are overestimated in their potential to develop S. Ns are usually thought of as having most of the strengths of S, perhaps losing a few minor ones, but with lots of other abilities that make up for what they lose. Sensors are thought of as more limited in scope and capacity.

    I believe, however, that the bias is wholly unconscious, and reflects the Intuitive preferences of many authors who write about type. I think that it may be important to get more Sensors involved in re-writing their own descriptions, just to ensure that any bias that may exist is removed. I believe that the process, if effective at all, would still require many years to remove the bias. I personally believe that the bias cannot be eliminated, because all humans admire creativity to some degree, and want to believe that they possess it.

  7. #37
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Where did you get that? It's not that the "S definition" is not positive, it's that there is an imbalance in the type, number, and magnitude of language used to describe the positives between S and N (well, more precisely, between the ISTP and INTP description.) As a result, one is made to look more appealing than the other on face value. I never said there were no positives in the ISTP description.
    ...I'm still laughing at how N vs S this entire exchange is. You're quantifying details, I'm talking big picture after stepping back.

    Anyway, none of this is an argument against my contention that the glossier N descriptions have a persuasive impact on people trying to type themselves. EVERY person I've had take a test or read the descriptions IRL has chosen an N type first. Even my mother, who is the most ISTJ woman on the planet, chose INTJ. And really, this is not surprising, nor does it take a fucking rocket scientist to see why. I tend to think that things would be more balanced if only the socionics descriptions existed, because those seem to give a fair assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of different types, and they're not gussied up because someone really loves being an INFP or INTP.
    Then write some damned decent descriptions. You've ridden this horse before, it gets old.
    If N's were complaining because S's were writing all the descriptions, I'd tell them the same thing.
    If you don't like how N's write your descriptions, write some new ones.
    Abdicating personality systems and system descriptions to Ns is bound to make you very unhappy.

    And you're still overlooking a bunch of other problems: I think one that is far more prevalent than some cynical bias against N writers on your part is simply that that people really don't understand N, and so they naturally try to label it as "creativity." But all types are creative, and it's the style of creativity that tends to change among N vs S. Both Ns and Ss make this mistake, and S's who are creative automatically think they must be N because they are creative, and no one wants to be called "not creative."

    Anyway, I'm responding more to your negative tone than to your content, and it's not really an important issue for me so... I don't really have anything else to say about it. Been there, discussed this before.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #38
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    And every single SJ type description that tries to be humorous mentions a lack of creativity. Which is sad because we can have very inspired Ne moments from time to time.

    Personally, I don't think the issue is that S descriptions are bad (although they can be); I think it's that N descriptions are over-inflated. They make NFJs look like they have mystical powers, they make NTJs look like they are destined to rule the world, they make NTPs look like the only people capable of innovation, and they make NFPs look like figures of unsurpassed artistic brilliance which none but themselves can understand. Whereas, SPs and SJs look like... normal people.

    I agree that it would be better to just write up a better description. But I don't know other types as well as I know myself, and what's really needed is an N (or two, or three) who can write type descriptions in a less egotistical fashion.

    p.s. I picked ESTJ first, and never considered N, ftr
    Agreed, I always wanted to be S and still want but I am not able to score anything else but entj on tests, not even entp
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  9. #39
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Posts about wiki moved here: http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...criptions.html

    Check it out!

    -end of thread-

  10. #40
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    I think I understand what Orangey is trying to say, here.

    I can definitely agree that there's some bias in Keirsey's descriptions, after having read some less biased ones. However, the problem is twofold. Keirsey's descriptions and similar ones are the most popular, AND the communities that have been established all have this bias among the members as a result. I am not certain precisely how much mistyping this bias has resulted in, although I'm sure it has resulted in some.

    I think that in Keirsey's descriptions, and in most people's minds, Sensors are underestimated in their potential to develop N, and Intuitives are overestimated in their potential to develop S. Ns are usually thought of as having most of the strengths of S, perhaps losing a few minor ones, but with lots of other abilities that make up for what they lose. Sensors are thought of as more limited in scope and capacity.

    I believe, however, that the bias is wholly unconscious, and reflects the Intuitive preferences of many authors who write about type. I think that it may be important to get more Sensors involved in re-writing their own descriptions, just to ensure that any bias that may exist is removed. I believe that the process, if effective at all, would still require many years to remove the bias. I personally believe that the bias cannot be eliminated, because all humans admire creativity to some degree, and want to believe that they possess it.
    Totally with you until the bolded. I know you and Jennifer are trying to give some positive advice (and a type wiki thing sound like an interesting project), but I would like to point out that it is by no means inevitable that if Ns write descriptions (especially self-described "Ns" on the internet, or that idiot Keirsey) that they're going to be biased in favor of N. The inflation of the N profiles on a lot of sites is still in need of better explanation than just "they're Ns. It's what they do." I mean, those socionics fuckers have no such problems, what the hell is wrong with Keirsey?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    ...I'm still laughing at how N vs S this entire exchange is. You're quantifying details, I'm talking big picture after stepping back.
    Is that what you're doing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Then write some damned decent descriptions. You've ridden this horse before, it gets old.
    If N's were complaining because S's were writing all the descriptions, I'd tell them the same thing.
    If you don't like how N's write your descriptions, write some new ones.
    Abdicating personality systems and system descriptions to Ns is bound to make you very unhappy.
    Okay, mommy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    And you're still overlooking a bunch of other problems: I think one that is far more prevalent than some cynical bias against N writers on your part is simply that that people really don't understand N, and so they naturally try to label it as "creativity." But all types are creative, and it's the style of creativity that tends to change among N vs S. Both Ns and Ss make this mistake, and S's who are creative automatically think they must be N because they are creative, and no one wants to be called "not creative."
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Anyway, I'm responding more to your negative tone than to your content, and it's not really an important issue for me so... I don't really have anything else to say about it. Been there, discussed this before.
    Already knew that. It's what you do.

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    This is very true. I agree that there are a lot of things you can derive from the S descriptions by reading between the lines. Then again this is easier when you read the N ones first.

    I always liked the socionics descrptions from this side best: http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ikisocion_home
    Yeah, I like those too.

    Quote Originally Posted by EJCC View Post
    Personally, I don't think the issue is that S descriptions are bad (although they can be); I think it's that N descriptions are over-inflated. They make NFJs look like they have mystical powers, they make NTJs look like they are destined to rule the world, they make NTPs look like the only people capable of innovation, and they make NFPs look like figures of unsurpassed artistic brilliance which none but themselves can understand. Whereas, SPs and SJs look like... normal people.


    You've taken the words out of my mouth. I don't know what I'd do if you weren't here to NOT willfully misunderstand me on all counts.

    :workout::workout::workout::workout:
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

Similar Threads

  1. [Enne] Why I Am No Longer An Enneagrammist
    By Mal12345 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-07-2014, 10:10 AM
  2. [Enne] Even Though I Am No Longer An Enneagrammist...
    By Mal12345 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-01-2014, 09:42 AM
  3. [INTP] INTP men, how do you behave when you are no longer attracted to a girl?
    By Almari in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-14-2012, 10:29 PM
  4. I forgot what I was going to talk about...
    By Cloudblue in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-09-2010, 03:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO